Very long-term outcome of 68 vena cava filters percutaneously implanted

Between January 1987 and December 1991, 68 consecutive patients aged 71.5 +/- 12.0 years underwent percutaneous implantation of a vena caval filter, mainly the LGM (N = 64). Fifty seven patients had pulmonary embolism, 61 had deep vein thrombosis of the lower limbs. The average follow-up interval was 4.9 +/- 3.3 years (7.0 +/- 2.7 years for the patients still alive). The follow-up included a telephonic enquiry to determine the date and cause of death, recurrent deep vein thrombosis and/or pulmonary embolism; surviving patients underwent clinical examination, plain abdominal X-ray with a lateral decubitus view and duplex ultrasonography of the lower limb veins to assess the patency of the filter. Fifty three per cent of the patients died. Four predictive factors for mortality were identified: a contra-indication to anticoagulant therapy, chronic post-embolic cor pulmonale, an indication of prophylactic implantation in the elderly and the presence of underlying malignant disease. There were 5.8% recurrences of pulmonary embolism, 26.1% of lower limb deep vein thrombosis and 25% of filter thrombosis. The only predictive factor of thrombosis was a proximal venous thrombus and was associated in 50% of filter thrombosis. Seventy per cent of the plain abdominal X-rays were abnormal with 9 displacements. 9 migrations and 10 closures of the filters. There was a significant correlation between closure on plain abdominal X-ray and caval thrombosis and between recurrent deep vein thrombosis and caval thrombosis. The frequency of long-term complications after implantation of a caval filter in this study suggests that interruption of the vena cava should be reserved for the only validated indications in the presence of a formal contra-indication to or failure of anticoagulant therapy. Other indications require evaluation with prospective randomised trials.     

Initial clinical experience with an endoluminal spiral prosthesis for treating complicated venous thrombosis and preventing pulmonary embolism

Fourteen patients with complicated venous thrombosis or recurrent pulmonary embolism were treated by implantation of an endoluminal spiral prosthesis subsequent to balloon angioplasty, surgical thrombectomy or embolectomy, a combination of these, or, in 2 cases, no other treatment. The patients were divided into 2 groups, based on their primary diagnosis and the purpose of the prosthesis. Group I included 8 patients with extensive iliofemoral or caval thrombosis, caused by congenital caval stenosis (1 case) or extravascular compression or retraction (7 cases); 7 of these patients had had previous operations, and the remaining patient had undergone thrombolysis, which failed. The current treatment consisted of balloon angioplasty and surgical thrombectomy or embolectomy, and implantation of an endoluminal spiral stent to prevent elastic recoil of the vessel. In 4 cases, an arteriovenous fistula was constructed and was taken down 3 months later; in 1 additional patient, a bilateral arteriovenous fistula was created. Group II comprised 6 patients with recurrent pulmonary embolism (4 cases), massive pulmonary embolism (1 case), or paradoxical bilateral carotid artery embolism (1 case). Four of these patients underwent surgical thrombectomy or embolectomy, while 2 had no treatment other than filter implantation. All 6 underwent transluminal implantation of a helix caval filter (a modification of the endoluminal spiral stent). All but 1 implantation was accomplished by means of either a transfemoral or a transjugular cutdown; the remaining implantation was performed transatrially after a pulmonary embolectomy. The only device-related complication was a retroperitoneal hematoma in Group I, resulting from perforation of the inferior vena cava by the guidewire during device implantation. This complication necessitated an emergency laparotomy and takedown of the arteriovenous fistula, which resulted in rethrombosis of the left iliofemoral vein. The other 7 stented veins were patent at early phlebographic follow-up, as were all 5 of those studied later. One Group-I patient died 4 months after surgery, due to tumor progression and without signs of caval restenosis. Twelve months postoperatively, 1 Group-II patient died of urosepsis without a recurrence of pulmonary embolism. Four of the 6 Group-II patients were studied late postoperatively, and all of their stented vessels were patent. There was no operative mortality or postoperative embolism. On the basis of these results, we conclude that endoluminal stenting with an expandable spiral prosthesis is a promising method for remote venous reconstruction. Moreover, it appears that the modified stent, or helix caval filter, compares favorably with commercially available filters.     

Interruption of the inferior vena cava for prevention of pulmonary embolism: transvenous filter devices

The availability of a safe, effective, and easily introducible percutaneous vena cava filter is crucial in the management of certain patients with pulmonary embolism. If thrombolytic or anticoagulant therapy for pulmonary embolism is contraindicated or fails, interruption of the inferior vena cava (IVC) blood flow is the logical alternative. Indications for filter insertion include a contraindication to anticoagulation, or recurrent pulmonary embolism despite adequate anticoagulation therapy. Common routes of filter insertion are from the right internal jugular vein, or the right or left femoral veins. The Mobin-Uddin umbrella filter (no longer available in the USA) and the Kimray-Greenfield filters have been the most widely used. Complications of vena cava filters include malpositioning, migration, venous thrombosis proximal or distal to the filter, hemorrhage at the percutaneous site of insertion, or sepsis. Despite these problems, IVC filters have been extremely useful in the management of pulmonary embolism among certain subsets of patients. Percutaneously inserted filters have now superseded surgical vena caval interruption in most US centers. Newer filters are currently under development in the US and Europe, and feature improved filtering function, anti-tilt abilities, retrievability, memory wire properties, and improved ease of insertion.     

A case of chronic recurrent pulmonary embolism treated by pulmonary embolectomy and Günther vena caval filter implantation

A case report of chronic recurrent pulmonary embolism treated by embolectomy and Günther vena caval filter. A 62-year-old man had suffered from dyspnea on effort for 4 years, and his feeling of dyspnea had gradually increased during the past 3 months. On the day of admission he was in a preshock state, and his pulmonary artery pressure was very high at 90/30 mmHg. Pulmonary blood perfusion scintigraphy showed multiple defects of isotope uptake. Immediately after the scintigraphy, pulmonary embolectomy was performed while using extracorporeal circulation. The operation was successful and his physical activity was markedly improved. After the operation, anti-coagulant and anti-platelet therapies were continued, but recurrence of pulmonary emboli was detected by scintigraphy, and some thrombi were found by venography in deep veins of the lower parts of both legs. To prevent recurrent pulmonary embolism, a Günther vena caval filter was inserted into the inferior vena cava. We considered this case as an acute worsening of chronic recurrent pulmonary embolism and we had the impression that pulmonary embolectomy is a very effective therapeutic method for serious pulmonary embolism, and that insertion of the Günther vena caval filter is a very easy and safe procedure.     

Experience with the helix cava filter

A new caval filter of helico-spiral geometry (Helix-Filter) was implanted in 13 patients for the prevention of pulmonary embolism (PE). The indications for implantation were: recurrent PE despite adequate anticoagulation (5 cases) or contraindication to anticoagulation (3 cases), incomplete local therapeutic fibrinolysis after severe paracentral PE (2 cases), and prophylaxis in high risk patients (3 cases). Implantation was effected by the saphenous/femoral vein approach in 12 patients, and via the right atrial appendage during open heart surgery in one instance. There were no intraoperative technical problems and in no case was the filter misplaced. During the follow-up period (mean 14.8 months, maximum 28 months) no filter-related complications were encountered. One patient with an exceptionally enlarged vena cava, due to abnormal renal vein inflow, had a fatal recurrent PE despite high dosage heparinization. One patient with an event-free follow-up died 12 months after filter placement from unrelated diseases. The remaining 11 patients are free of symptoms with no recurrent PE, no deterioration of venous circulation or presence of caval thrombosis. Emboli trapped at the filter were documented in 2 patients; spontaneous resolution occurred in one case. Experimental and early clinical results indicate that the hemodynamically optimal design of the Helix-Filter permits controlled and uniform luminal filtering with high patency. As such, it represents an alternative and highly promising solution to the problem of "mechanical" prevention of pulmonary embolism in selected patients.     

Inferior Vena Cava Filters in Patients with Recurrent Pulmonary Embolism

Background

There are sparse data to support the recommendation for inferior vena cava (IVC) filters in patients with recurrent pulmonary embolism while on anticoagulant therapy.

Management and prevention of thromboembolic events in patients with cancer-related hypercoagulable states

Objective: To determine the optimal strategy for managing and preventing thromboembolic events in malignancy-associated hypercoagulable states. Design: A Markov-based decision and cost-effectiveness analysis was performed. The authors explicitly considered consequences of embolic and bleeding events, filter complications, and cancer-related excess mortality. Data were drawn from the current literature. The main outcome measure for each strategy was the quality-adjusted life expectancy and the total average variable costs. Subjects: Patients with advanced malignancies prone to develop thromboembolic events, patients with acute proximal deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and patients who have survived a first episode of pulmonary embolism (PE). Interventions: The authors considered three different interventions: 1)observation, in which neither anticoagulant therapy nor filter placement is pursued, 2)anticoagulation, in which long-term anticoagulant therapy is started immediately, and 3)vena caval filter Main results: Vena caval filter was the preferred strategy for every malignancy studied, yielding an 11% gain in quality-adjusted life expectancy, compared with observation, for patients with acute DVT, and an 18% gain for patients having survived a PE. Anticoagulant therapy yielded gains of 9% and 16%, respectively. Compared with anticoagulant therapy, filter was less costly due to the avoidance of additional expenses incurred by bleeding events. Prophylactic therapy was the least effective of the three strategies examined. Conclusions: Vena caval filter placement and long-term anticoaguiation therapy yield similar outcomes in the setting of cancer-related hypercoagulable states. However, filter insertion is less expensive than anticoaguiation. Given the short life expectancy and morbidity of patients with end-stage malignancy, patient preferences for health states must be considered in the decision-making process. If active treatment is pursued, vena caval filter should be used as a primary therapy. Prophylactic therapy is not warranted in any circumstance.     

Interventions in pulmonary embolism

Various interventions are available to assist in the management of patients with pulmonary embolism. Most are reserved for patients who either fail standard systemic anticoagulation therapy or are not candidates for anticoagulant therapy. The most common intervention is placement of a vena caval filter. Several different filter devices are available, most of which may be placed percutaneously. Pulmonary thrombolysis with urokinase or streptokinase may be appropriate in some patients with severe, symptomatic pulmonary embolism. Finally, pulmonary embolectomy by means of either a transvenous catheter or surgical technique may be necessary in cases of refractory cardiovascular collapse.     

Pulmonary embolism: Current treatment options

Optional statement The initial treatment of patients with acute pulmonary embolism has traditionally involved unfractionated heparin. Given the more predictable pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties of low molecular weight heparins, their simpler (fixed) dosing regimens, and few or no laboratory monitoring requirements, low molecular weight heparins are gradually replacing heparin for the initial treatment of most patients diagnosed with acute pulmonary embolism, except in very obese patients or patients with renal failure. Only selected patients with massive, life-threatening pulmonary embolism should be managed with intravenously administered thrombolytic drugs, surgical embolectomy, or catheter-based embolectomy. Likewise, inferior vena caval filter should be considered only in patients with an absolute contraindication to, or a documented failure of, anticoagulant therapy. New anticoagulants, such as ximelagatran, an oral direct thrombin inhibitor, or fondaparinux and idraparinux, selective factor Xa inhibitors with an almost complete bioavailability after subcutaneous injection are promising alternatives, but these drugs have yet to find a place in the initial treatment of pulmonary embolism in standard day-to-day clinical practice. Long-term anticoagulation treatment is still provided by antivitamin K antagonists (eg, warfarin), which unfortunately have a narrow therapeutic window. Consequently, time-consuming monitoring is required to ensure the therapeutic anticoagulant effect. A target International Normalized Ratio (INR) of 2.5 (INR range: 2.0 to 3.0) is recommended for warfarin therapy. This treatment should be continued for at least 3 months for patients with a first episode of pulmonary embolism secondary to a transient (reversible) risk factor, or up to 6 to 12 months for patients with a first episode of idiopathic pulmonary embolism.     

Partial interruption of the inferior vena cava using a percutaneous endovenous filter

Partial interruption of the inferior vena cava (IVCI) by a percutaneous endovenous filter (Günther filter n = 65, LEM filter n = 36) was undertaken in 100 patients with an average of 72 +/- 11 years for recent deep vein thrombosis. The indications were: contraindications to anticoagulant therapy (36.5%); recurrent pulmonary embolism (12%); threatening venous thrombosis with a previous embolic episode (12%); caval thrombosis (15.7%); prophylactic, with no previous pulmonary embolism (23.8%). The filters were evaluated at short and mid term. There were no technical problems. The mortality rate was 17.5%, one death being probably due to recurrent pulmonary embolism. No other recurrences of pulmonary embolism were observed, indicating an efficacy of 99 per cent. The early patency rate was 96.5%, there being no difference between the two filters used, independent of the initial site of venous thrombosis, of distal migration of the filter and associated medical treatment (anticoagulation). Distal migration was observed in 76% of IVCI by the Günther filter and 48.5% by the LEM filter (p less than 0.001); tilting was observed in 7.4% of Günther and 3% of LEM filters. Five LEM filters were incompletely opened. The IVC was transfixed by 3 Günther filters. One Günther filter had fractured spokes. There were 12 recurrences of lower limb deep vein thrombosis and 16 post-deep vein thrombosis complications were recorded. These percutaneous endovenous filters are similar to the Kimray Greenfield filter with respect to efficacy and permeability although the follow-up was relatively short. The advantages of these percutaneous filters are the facility, innocuity and rapidity of their insertion with, however, a higher incidence of distal migration.     

腔静脉过滤器预防肺动脉栓塞的临床研究

目的：评估腔静脉过滤器预防肺动脉栓塞的临床疗效。方法：对10例下肢深静脉血栓患(4例已并发肺栓塞)植入腔静脉过滤器。观察其预防肺栓塞的效果。结果：10例患共植入过滤器10个，其类型为：西蒙记忆合金过滤器3个、Greenfield过滤器3个和郁金香(Tulip)过滤器4个。过滤器植入后经尿激酶溶栓7例下肢血栓溶解消失，余3例残留部分血栓，4例肺梗死灶全部消失，随访2至36个月，未再发肺梗死，没有出现过滤器移位、下腔静脉阻塞现象。结论：下腔静脉过滤器植入术是一种安全、有效、可预防肺动脉栓塞发生的临床措施。     

Rupture and extravascular migration of a vena cava filter. Apropos of a case]

The authors report the case of a 68 year old woman who underwent implantation of a Greenfield vena caval filter for recurrent pulmonary embolism. Migration of the filter out of the vena cava into the perivenal fat was discovered two years later during another embolic episode. One of the spokes of the filter had migrated into the iliac fossa. This case illustrates two possible complications of caval filters: rupture and migration. The increasing number of cases reported in the literature indicates the necessity of keeping a register of the complications encountered with different models to avoid the most dangerous ones.     

Inferior vena cava filters for recurrent thrombosis: current evidence

Inferior vena cava filters are often used as alternatives to anticoagulant therapy for the prevention of pulmonary embolism. Many of the clinical data that support the use of these devices stem from relatively limited retrospective studies. The dual purpose of this review is to examine the incidence of thrombotic complications associated with inferior vena cava filters and to discuss the role of anticoagulant therapy concurrent with filter placement. Device-associated morbidity and overall efficacy can be considered only in the context of rates of vena cava thrombosis, insertion-site thrombosis, recurrent deep venous thrombosis, and recurrent pulmonary embolism.     

Vena caval filters: a comprehensive review

Hematologists are often asked to treat patients with venous thromboembolic disease. Although anticoagulation remains the primary therapy for venous thromboembolism, vena caval filters are an important alternative when anticoagulants are contraindicated. To assess the evidence supporting the utility of these devices, a comprehensive review of the English language literature was performed. Except for one randomized trial, the vena caval filter literature consists of case series or consecutive case series. The mean duration of follow-up for each of the 5 filter types varies from 6 to 18 months. All are about equally effective in the prevention of pulmonary embolism (2.6%-3.8%). Deep venous thrombosis (6%-32%) and inferior vena cava thrombosis (3.6%-11.2%) after filter placement vary widely among different filter types primarily because of differences in outcome assessment. Thrombosis at the insertion site is a common complication of filter placement (23%-36%). In view of the absence of randomized comparisons, no filter can be designated as superior in safety or efficacy. Vena caval filters represent a potentially important but poorly evaluated therapeutic modality in the prevention of pulmonary emboli. Randomized trials are necessary to establish the appropriate place for vena caval filters in the treatment of venous thromboembolic disease. (Blood. 2000;95:3669-3677)     

Present-day role of vena cava filters

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present is to assess the effectiveness of pulmonary embolism prevention using temporary or permanent vena cava filters in deep venous thromboses of the lower extremities with a discussion of indications and complications. METHODS: In the period between 1989 and 1998 we observed 46 patients (33 m, 13 f) suffering from deep venous thrombosis of the lower extremities. RESULTS: The cases treated with cava filter showed an improvement in clinical conditions in 15-19 cases with 4/19 cases of complications: filter ascent, lipothymia, one case of pneumothorax and one case of filter ascent with thrombosis of the contralateral venous axis. All complications were solved without further sequelae. After catheterisation of the femoral vein, the thrombosis of the contralateral venous axis in patients with caval filter was a frequently observed event (in 75% of cases). In the cases without filter, an evident improvement was observed in 22/27 cases, a slight improvement in 2/27 cases, with 3/27 cases of complications: two cases of cardiocirculatory arrest and one case of severe dyspnea with suspected pulmonary embolism which survived the event. CONCLUSIONS: From our experience, the use of caval filters is unquestionably useful for the prevention of pulmonary embolism, but is not wholly free from complications.     

Vena cava filter for prevention of pulmonary embolism

Vena caval filters in the prevention of pulmonary embolism All currently available caval filters can be implanted percutaneously in local anaesthesia. In the USA the FDA has approved the stainless steel Greenfield filter, the Titanium Greenfield filter, the Bird's Nest filter, the LGM or VenaTech filter and the Simon Nitinol filter. Some other caval filters are commercially available in Europe, but there exist only few clinical trials about them. The Greenfield filter is implanted since the early seventies and the greatest amount of data has been published about it. Standard indications for filter placement are recurrent pulmonary embolism despite adequate anticoagulation, in patients after pulmonary embolectomy, when there is a contraindication to anticoagulation (e.g. fresh surgical wound, active gastrointestinal bleeding, recent haemorrhagic stroke, major trauma,...) and when serious complications occur after thrombolysis or anticoagulation. In patients who suffer from severe cardiopulmonary disease both a caval filter and anticoagulation may be required. Follow-up investigations include plain abdominal radiography and duplex ultrasound, in special cases computed tomography, cavography, magnetic resonance imaging in newer filter types, and intravascular ultrasound. Complications include recurrent pulmonary embolism, caval obstruction, migration, fracture and perforation of filter struts. As clinically relevant complications are rare, in diligently selected cases the patient will benefit from implantation of a caval filter.     

Treatment of recurrent stroke and pulmonary thromboembolism with percutaneous closure of a patent foramen ovale and placement of inferior vena cava filter.

The association between recurrent episodes of pulmonary embolism, stroke, and congenital anomalies of the clotting system features a condition of increased risk of recurrences despite anticoagulant therapy. We report the successful management of this association with percutaneous closure of the foramen ovale and placement of an inferior caval vein filter.     

An unusual thromboembolic complication of a Greenfield vena caval filter

The Greenfield inferior vena caval filter is highly effective in preventing recurrent pulmonary embolism and is associated with a low incidence of complications. We have recently seen a patient with the unusual finding of recurrent pulmonary embolism due to extension of thrombus from the surface of a Greenfield filter. The proximal extension of thrombus from a partially obstructed filter is documented by venacavogram. The proposed mechanism is discussed and principles of management are reviewed.     

综合与保守治疗深静脉血栓形成的疗效对比

目的评价下腔静脉滤器置入后综合治疗与保守治疗在深静脉血栓形成患者治疗中的疗效和安全性。方法 2004年1月至2010年8月确诊深静脉血栓形成的79例患者中,47例经同意后行下腔静脉滤器置入并静脉溶栓合并抗凝治疗,进入实验组;32例作为对照组给予抗凝治疗。收集所有患者的临床资料,对比治疗结果。结果实验组猝死率及肺栓塞率低于对照组,差异有统计学意义[0 vs.6.25%（2/32）,P〈0.05;0 vs.15.62%（5/32）,P〈0.05]。实验组患肢治疗总有效率高于对照组,差异有统计学意义[100%（47/47）vs.81.25%（26/32）,P〈0.05]。结论下腔静脉滤器置入后经患肢足背静脉给予尿激酶溶栓并抗凝综合治疗是安全有效的,并能预防肺动脉栓塞的发生。     

Use of a temporary caval filter in a young man with pulmonary embolism to prevent migration of massive caval thrombus during an attempt of caval thrombolysis

A 33 year old male with no known risk factors for hypercoagulability developed a massive thrombi in the inferior vena cava (IVC). The patient had a history of both pulmonary embolism and embolism related syncope. The thrombus which extended proximally to the level of the renal vein and distally to the left superficial femoral vein did not respond to anticoagulant therapy or thrombolysis. Thirteen days after admission, we decided to use a temporary caval filter to provide protection from migration of the thrombus while attempting invasive thrombolytic therapy, which was performed using a tissue type plasminogen activator through a coaxial catheter of the temporary filter. This resulted in a marked decrease in the size of the thrombus, and multiple thrombi were found to be trapped in the temporary filter. Although the temporary caval filter was effective in capturing emboli, resulting in a decrease in the thrombus size, the thrombus was not completely dissolved within two weeks, which is the maximal implantation time. A permanent filter was eventually used to prevent pulmonary embolism, which could arise from the remaining thrombus. We have found placement of a temporary caval filter to be a safe and effective adjunct, in select cases, when attempting thrombolysis of massive thrombi in the IVC. Since we inserted the temporary filter 13 days after admission, use of a temporary filter during thrombolysis may have been more effective if conducted earlier in our patient's clinical course.